beanshell-users

hi,
from what i know there are two problems with bsh in bsf 2.3: first,
the bsf imports are still pointing at com.ibm.bsf, and second the bsh
engine does not pick up classloader settings from the BSFManager. is
this
one of those or a new problem?
the first is a known issue that is supposed to be fixed in CVS
eventually.
i think pat wanted to retain support for 2.2, so it's a little more
complex
than just changing the imports. the second issue is more interesting.
of course you can modify the BeanShellBSFEngine.initialize() to say
"interpreter.setClassLoader( mgr.getClassLoader() )" but then you lose
support for bsh's classpath stuff.
and i'd add another accusatory finger pointing at IBM, for their dearth
of
information on the current fate of bsf. (a google for "bean scripting
framework"
returns developerWorks at #1, where they make zero mention of the fact
that
they no longer maintain bsf, leading people to believe that 2.2 is the
latest
release [which then further alienates potential developers as it seems a
dead
project]).=20
anyway the engine is a "glue" piece that has to know about both bsh and
bsf,
so wherever it's packaged these issues may come up. eg, witness the
javascript
engine packaged with bsf that is incompatible with the latest rhino dist
(1.5R4
when i checked). on the other hand given the relatively "relaxed"
development
speed of both bsh and bsf, it wouldn't be too hard to get them in sync.
j.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Schulz [mailto:mschulz@...]=20
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 7:54 AM
> To: beanshell-users@...
> Subject: [Beanshell-users] Re: support for BSF 2.3
>=20
>=20
> In the light of the announced BeanShell - BSF 2.3 support on=20
> the beanshell homepage (confused?), I am somewhat=20
> disappointed that this support is actually broken.
>=20
> I don't think burdening unsuspecting users with a manual=20
> modification to the BeanShellBSFEngine class is the right thing to do.
>=20
> To do you guys justice, I think the actual culprit are the=20
> Apache BSF hackers, claiming Beanshell support on which they=20
> don't deliver. Maybe the best approach would be to ensure=20
> that a working engine is donated to, included and supported=20
> with the BSF default language setup.
>=20
> Thanks for providing this nice scripting environment in the=20
> first place!
>=20
> Martin
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf=20
> _______________________________________________
> Beanshell-users mailing list Beanshell-users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/beanshell-users
>=20